Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
J Pediatr ; 229: 70-77, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32976895

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe enrollment characteristics of youth in the Cascade Screening for Awareness and Detection of FH Registry. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional analysis of 493 participants aged <18 years with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia recruited from US lipid clinics (n = 20) between April 1, 2014, and January 12, 2018. At enrollment, some were new patients and some were already in care. Clinical characteristics are described, including lipid levels and lipid-lowering treatments. RESULTS: Mean age at diagnosis was 9.4 (4.0) years; 47% female, 68% white and 12% Hispanic. Average (SD) highest Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was 238 (61) mg/dL before treatment. Lipid-lowering therapy was used by 64% of participants; 56% were treated with statin. LDL-C declined 84 mg/dL (33%) among those treated with lipid-lowering therapy; statins produced the greatest decline, 100 mg/dL (39% reduction). At enrollment, 39% had reached an LDL-C goal, either <130 mg/dL or ≥50% decrease from pre-treatment; 20% of those on lipid-lowering therapy reached both goals. CONCLUSIONS: Among youth enrolled in the Cascade Screening for Awareness and Detection of FH Registry, diagnosis occurred relatively late, only 77% of children eligible for lipid-lowering therapy were receiving treatment, and only 39% of those treated met their LDL-C goal. Opportunities exist for earlier diagnosis, broader use of lipid-lowering therapy, and greater reduction of LDL-C levels.


Subject(s)
Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/epidemiology , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/therapy , Adolescent , Anticholesteremic Agents/therapeutic use , Child , Cholesterol, LDL/blood , Coronary Artery Disease/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dietary Supplements , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/blood , Life Style , Male , Registries , United States/epidemiology
2.
JAMA Cardiol ; 5(8): 871-880, 2020 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32401264

ABSTRACT

Importance: Clinical and economic consequences of statin treatment guidelines supplemented by targeted coronary artery calcium (CAC) assessment have not been evaluated in African American individuals, who are at increased risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and less likely than non-African American individuals to receive statin therapy. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline without a recommendation for CAC assessment vs the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline recommendation for use of a non-0 CAC score measured on one occasion to target generic-formulation, moderate-intensity statin treatment in African American individuals at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: A microsimulation model was designed to estimate life expectancy, quality of life, costs, and health outcomes over a lifetime horizon. African American-specific data from 472 participants in the Jackson Heart Study (JHS) at intermediate risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and other US population-specific data on individuals from published sources were used. Data analysis was conducted from November 11, 2018, to November 1, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), discounted at 3% annually. Results: In a model-based economic evaluation informed in part by follow-up data, the analysis was focused on 472 individuals in the JHS at intermediate risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; mean (SD) age was 63 (6.7) years. The sample included 243 women (51.5%) and 229 men (48.5%). Of these, 178 of 304 participants (58.6%) who underwent CAC assessment had a non-0 CAC score. In the base-case scenario, implementation of 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines without CAC assessment provided a greater quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.0027 QALY) at a higher cost ($428.97) compared with the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline strategy with CAC assessment, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $158 325/QALY, which is considered to represent low-value care by the ACC/AHA definition. The 2018 ACC/AHA guideline strategy with CAC assessment provided greater quality-adjusted life expectancy at a lower cost compared with the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines without CAC assessment when there was a strong patient preference to avoid use of daily medication therapy. In probability sensitivity analyses, the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline strategy with CAC assessment was cost-effective compared with the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines without CAC assessment in 76% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay value of $100 000/QALY when there was a preference to lose 2 weeks of perfect health to avoid 1 decade of daily therapy. Conclusions and Relevance: A CAC assessment-guided strategy for statin therapy appears to be cost-effective compared with initiating statin therapy in all African American individuals at intermediate risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and may provide greater quality-adjusted life expectancy at a lower cost than a non-CAC assessment-guided strategy when there is a strong patient preference to avoid the need for daily medication. Coronary artery calcium testing may play a role in shared decision-making regarding statin use.


Subject(s)
Black or African American , Calcium/analysis , Coronary Vessels/chemistry , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Vascular Calcification/diagnosis , Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Coronary Disease/economics , Coronary Disease/prevention & control , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Care Costs , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/economics , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Economic , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Risk Factors , Vascular Calcification/economics
3.
Am Heart J ; 189: 40-47, 2017 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28625380

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) alternatives to warfarin are available for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to describe the factors associated with selection of NOACs versus warfarin in patients with new onset AF. METHODS: The ORBIT-AF II study is a national, US, prospective, observational, cohort study of anticoagulation treatment in patients with AF receiving NOACs or warfarin in the United States from 2013 to 2016. We measured factors associated with oral anticoagulant selection in 4,670 patients recently diagnosed with AF. RESULTS: At baseline, 1,169 (25%) patients were started on warfarin and 3,501 (75%) on NOACs: of these latter, 259 (6%) were started on dabigatran, 1858 (40%) on rivaroxaban, and 1384 (30%) on apixaban. Those receiving NOACs were slightly younger patients (median age 71 vs 72, P<.0001); were less likely to have prior stroke (5.3% vs 8.6%; P<.0001) or prior bleeding (2.7% vs 4.4%; P=.005); had better kidney function (mean estimated glomerular filtration rate 91 mL/min vs 80 mL/min, P<.0001); and had fewer patients at high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc score [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75years, Diabetes mellitus, Prior stroke, transient ischemic attack {TIA}, or thromboembolism,Vascular disease, Age 65-74years, Sex category {female}] ≥2 in 86% vs 93%; P<.0001). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with NOAC selection versus warfarin included renal function, prior stroke or valve replacement, rhythm control AF management strategy, treatment by a cardiologist, and higher patient education level. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary clinical practice, up to three-fourths of patients with new-onset AF are now initially treated with a NOAC for stroke prevention. Those selected for NOAC treatment had lower stroke and bleeding risk profiles, were more likely treated by cardiologists, and had higher socioeconomic status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01701817.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Pyrazoles/administration & dosage , Pyridones/administration & dosage , Registries , Rivaroxaban/administration & dosage , Vitamin K/antagonists & inhibitors , Warfarin/administration & dosage , Administration, Oral , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Antithrombins/administration & dosage , Atrial Fibrillation/complications , Dabigatran/administration & dosage , Factor Xa Inhibitors , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Stroke/etiology , Stroke/prevention & control , Treatment Outcome
4.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 5(5)2016 05 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27146448

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Whereas insurance status has been previously associated with care patterns, little is currently known about the association between Medicaid insurance and the clinical characteristics, treatment, or outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from adults with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF), a national outpatient registry conducted at 176 community, multispecialty sites. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of patients prescribed any oral anticoagulation (OAC; warfarin or novel oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). Secondary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients prescribed NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban); time in therapeutic range (TTR) for warfarin users, all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleed. Of 10 133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) had Medicaid insurance. Medicaid patients were similarly likely to receive OAC at baseline (72.8% vs 76.3%; unadjusted P=0.079), but less likely to receive NOAC at baseline or follow-up (12.1% vs 16.3%; unadjusted P=0.019). After risk adjustment, Medicaid status was associated with lower use of OAC at baseline among patients with high stroke risk (odds ratio [OR]=0.68; 95% CI=0.49, 0.94), but was not associated with OAC use overall (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.61, 1.09). Among warfarin users, median TTR was lower among Medicaid patients (60% vs 68%; P<0.0001; adjusted TTR difference, -2.9; 95% CI=-5.7, -0.2; P=0.04). Use of an NOAC over 2 years of follow-up was not statistically different by insurance. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients had higher unadjusted rates of mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding; however, these differences were attenuated following adjustment for clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary AF cohort, use of OAC overall and use of NOACs were not significantly lower among Medicaid patients relative to others. However, among warfarin users, Medicaid patients spent less time in therapeutic range compared with those with other forms of insurance.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Embolism/prevention & control , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Medicaid , Mortality , Registries , Stroke/prevention & control , Administration, Oral , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Atrial Fibrillation/complications , Cause of Death , DNA-Binding Proteins , Dabigatran/therapeutic use , Drosophila Proteins , Embolism/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Rivaroxaban/therapeutic use , Stroke/etiology , Transcription Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States , Warfarin/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL